New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-02-08
A NFW TON ELL.

Secretary Manning is diplomatist hy breyct
for the Administration. He displayed few
weeks ago unwontcd vgor In dcnOuncing the
brutal fisheries policy of the Canadian author
tiles. IIe had been asked for information in
regard to the duties on fresh fish. and in re-
sponse electrified the House with a spirited
discussion Of the wrongs Of American fisher
men. The fabbincss Of the State Department
in dealing with the same question was strong
foil for this exhibition of patriotic indignation.
The House Committee on Foreign Affairs has
acted wisely in discriminating between the
Treasury and State Departments On this
question of the fisheries outragcs Secretary
Manning is better and more patriotic diplo-
matist than Secretary Bayard. His judgment
of the comparative merits of the Edmunds and
Belmont bills is moro authoritative than Sec
re;ary Bayards would have been. The House
Committee may haye passed a Illuminating
slight upon the State Department in going TO
the Treasury for counsel: but there were OK
collent reasons for the choice of advisers.
The Secretary's historical review Of this sub
ject is lucid and admirable He shows that
American vessels had no commercial privileges
in British ports until an agreement was DELHI
cTductN UIduC tctNCcn LILO Two OONtIIulcHiS III
1880 That agreement virtually superseded
the Treaty of 1878 so far as there was any
conflict between the provisions Of each COM
pact. When, therefore. the Dominion Gov
emment obtains the consent Of the Home Gov
cInment to an act for the forfeiture OF any
American fishing vessel entering a Canadian
port for any purpose other than Obtaining shell
ter repairs, wood or water, it ahrogatos the
commercial arrangements made in 1880. The
United States Government has only one course
open to it. If tho British authorities repeal
their law, the American law must also be re-
pealed. A suspension Of commercial privileges
on one side must he followed by suspension
Of tho same privileges in American ports
The SecretaIy's preferences SO far as the Ed
munds and Belmont measures are concerned
arc clearly IN favor of the more radical pro-
posal The draft of the bill presented by him
as substitute for both bills is Of a drastic
nature, empowering the Government to stop
Canadian railway trains on the border well
as to seize and condemn vessels and their
freight In our Judgment the Edmnnds bill
goes far enough, and the Sccretary's remedies
are too violent. Another year if the British
Government and lis dependencies continue their
predatory warfare upon American commerce, so
extreme measure might he justified. The
present emergency does not require absolute sus-
pension Of commercial intercourse on land and
sea. The motives Of the Administration i'll
presenting this measure arc open to criticism
but We prefer to deal generously with the pro-
posed scheme Of legislation and to give the
Secretary credit for good intentions. The Sen
ate can better afford to accept the more drastic
measure than to allow the session TO come 10
an end without rc,aliatory legislation OF some
sort. If the Administration has sufficient
strength to carry the Secrcjarys bill through
the House. it may lie prudent for the Senate
TO recede from its position. 1t would he an cX-
celent thing TO have the Administration fully
and unequivocally committed to the execution
Of one Of its own measures. There would be
a better chance Of holding it responsible for the
protection OF tho American fishing fleet